Table 3.
Description of landscape pattern metrics and ecological effect metrics used in this study.
Index | Equation | Ecological significance | |
---|---|---|---|
Landscape pattern metrics | Compactness index (CI) (Ye et al., 2012) |
where, Si and Pi are the area and perimeter of patch i, respectively. n is the total number of urban patches in the study area. |
The larger the CI value, the more compact the land space pattern. |
Patch density (PD) (Chen and Fu, 1996) | where, A is the total urban area, n is same as above. | PD is the opposite of CI. | |
Mean shape index (MSI) (Tian et al., 2003) | A larger MSI value indicates the space form is less coherent and the land space pattern is more dispersed. | ||
Ecological effect metrics | Value of Ecological Service (VES) (Hou and Qiao, 2012) |
where Vj and Sj are the VES of land use type j per unit area, and area of land use type j, respectively. m is the total number of land use types in the study area, with m = 1 (urban type) in this study. Vj (10000 Yuan/km2) for urban, farmland, forest, grassland, water body, and unused land are 0, 6, 19, 64, 542, and 3.71. |
|
Ecological elasticity (ECO) (Xu et al., 2010) |
where rj and ej are the area ratio of land type j to the total study area and elasticity value of land type j, respectively. The values of ej for urban, farmland, forest, grassland, water body, and unused land are 0.4, 0.5, 0.9, 0.6, 0.8 and 0.3. |
The ability of the ecosystem to return to its original state after disturbance. A higher ECO value indicates the ecosystem is more stable. ECO ranges from 0 to 1. | |
Ecological risk index (ERI) (Zhou et al., 2014) |
where Sj is the area of land use type j, A0 is the sample area, A0 = 5 km × 5 km in this study, ωj is ecological risk intensity of land used type j, the values of ωj for urban, farmland, forestland, grassland, water body are 0.29, 0.13, 0.03, 0.05 and 0.04. |
The lower ERI value, the better for ecosystem. ERI value ranges from 0 to 1. |